Journalism’s Standards of Fairness and Balance

Thank you, Neal Gabler for a sane, reasoned analysis of the difference between fair and so-called balanced journalism (“Moore’s Ax Falls on a Derelict Media Too,” Commentary, July 7). I believe there is a right-wing plot to take over so-called reporting of “news,” in particular the television and radio networks and outlets, from which much of our population gets its information; witness the screaming heads of Fox News and the suppression of a program such as Ted Koppel’s “Nightline” for reading the names of our children killed in Iraq.

Wake up, America! We are losing our precious freedom of speech. Speak up while you still can, and work to save our democracy.

Suzanne Schechter

Oxnard

Gabler is half right. By today’s standards, balance in news coverage does mean reflexive inclusion of conservative opinion no matter how egregious or unfounded. The obverse, however, has not been true for some time. Statistics from media watchdogs demonstrate a systematic exclusion of opinion to the left of centrists such as Sen. John F. Kerry. For example, there was no reflexive inclusion of antiwar opinion in the lead-up to the invasion, and this despite wide antiwar support here and abroad. Instead, spokespersons against the war had the same rate of appearance on our corporate airwaves as Ralph Nader has in the boardrooms of Halliburton.

Journalists like Gabler delude themselves. The real standards of balance are not set by those who work for the mainstream media, but by those who own them.

Doug Doepke

Claremont

Basically Gabler is saying that he doesn’t trust readers and viewers to decide for themselves who is credible. He wants the media to tell them what to think. This is an attitude held by many on the left.

Rory Johnston

Los Angeles